There are enough Republican crossover votes to pass a clean CR, Boehner won't allow the vote

reply to post by AlienScience


Weak and feeble responses to trick statements.

Emphasis Added;

Rep. Pat Meehan (R-Pa.): “At this point, I believe it’s time for the House to vote for a clean, short-term funding bill to bring the Senate to the table and negotiate a responsible compromise.” [Press Release, 10/1/13]Obama say no negotiate


Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.): A Grimm aide told The Huffington Post that the congressman supports a clean continuing resolution. [10/1/13]Grimm no say


Rep. Jon Runyan (R-N.J.): “Enough is enough. Put a clean [continuing resolution] on the floor and let’s get on with the business we were sent to do." [Burlington County Times, 10/1/13]Mmmaybe...too generic


Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.): A Fitzpatrick aide tells the Philadelphia Inquirer the congressman would support a clean funding bill if it came up for a vote. [Philadelphia Inquirer, 10/1/13]Fitzpatrick no say


Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.): LoBiondo told The Press of Atlantic City he'll support "whatever gets a successful conclusion" to the shutdown and a clean funding bill "is one of those options." [The Press of Atlantic City, 10/1/13]Too generic


Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.): The congressman issued a statement saying he would "vote in favor of a so-called clean budget bill." [Office of Rep. Jim Gerlach, 10/2/13]Hmm. "so-called ?


Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.): The congressman told Miami Herald reporter Marc Caputo that he would vote for a clean funding bill, provided it has the same funding levels contained in the Senate-passed bill. [The Miami Herald, 10/2/13]Hmmm. "but but if"

All weak and generic .....

Complete F-A-I-L

reply to post by xuenchen


You have more excuses to deny reality than I have ever seen. Just wow.

Tell me something, before the 2012 election...were you one of those people that were sure that Obama was going to lose the election??? You seem like the type.

So how do you explain that he won?

reply to post by AlienScience


You miss the point entirely.....

Congress is separated from the Executive branch....

Let Congress do their job, and IMO if these House bills were brought to the Senate floor, openly debated and voted on with the normal 2/3's passage requirement, you would see some shifting in the actual votes should it come to that...

Having said that, the Senate already knows that if they even pass a House bill, that the President has promised to veto...

Why not let the process run it's course? The House has done it's job, Senate? not so much, been stifled from doing their job.. and the President ? so far he is insulated from the process, besides adding to the blame game deal...

It's pretty simple when you know what's going on...

There must be some alternative reason to shut down the legislative process, and just simply blame the HOUSE...

I am no fan of either party, cannot stand how the Tea Party folks were ridiculed mocked and worse, (by both aisles), only to be somewhat absorbed by the right..but I do find it refreshing to see the House try and get DC back to doing it's job...

The beginnings of a third party and the traditional powers can't stand it...

reply to post by AlienScience


I have to agree with xuenchen on the 2-3 that quote an "aide". To me that means that congress person's office is floating a trial balloon to see the response from their constituency.

However, as a right leaner, I'll say that in my personal opinion, if the house has a majority that are in favor of ending the shutdown now...the Speaker should allow the vote. It sucks to lose, but elections have consequences.

AlienScience
reply to post by xuenchen

 

You have more excuses to deny reality than I have ever seen. Just wow.

Tell me something, before the 2012 election...were you one of those people that were sure that Obama was going to lose the election??? You seem like the type.

So how do you explain that he won?

I have no excuses.

Only logical observations and exposures to obvious tactics.

Excuses are for failures when logic leaves the mind.
[ sound familiar ? ]

2012 ? Let me think back.....

I wasn't sure.

" " So how do you explain that he won? " "

Hmmm.

Obviously, even smart people get fooled at least once.

And even some people seem to vote more than once.

Chick-A-Boom Boom Boom

reply to post by JacKatMtn

Let Congress do their job, and IMO if these House bills were brought to the Senate floor, openly debated and voted on with the normal 2/3's passage requirement, you would see some shifting in the actual votes should it come to that...

Opinions are like a certain body orifice that everyone has. You are entitled to your opinion, but I am presenting facts.

The Senate did it's job as well, it amended the House bill as they are entitled to and sent it back to the House. The House knows what bill the Senate will pass, and there are enough votes in the house to pass it...one man and a small minority in the House is preventing that.

So it is beyond my comprehension how you can blame Obama about it.

There must be some alternative reason to shut down the legislative process, and just simply blame the HOUSE

Yes, the reason is that a group of House Republicans thought they could use the threat of shutting down the government to get their agenda passed.

They picked the wrong fight, they though Obama and the Senate Democrats would bend because of their threat...and they didn't...and good for them for standing their ground. Now, they are stuck with owning the fact that they in fact shut down the government based on ideology, nothing more.

The majority in the House want to pass a clean CR, the majority in the Senate want to pass a clean CR, and the President wants to sign a clean CR...so who exactly is shutting down the legislative process to allow that to work???

If you can't see that it is Boehner and the Tea Party Republicans, then I honestly don't know what to tell you or show you.

Do you deny that the above is true, that the majority in both houses have stated they want to pass a clean CR and Obama said he would sign it?

reply to post by AlienScience


If there were enough Republicans to pass a clean no strings attached CR then Pelosi could get a majority to vote for a discharge petition as long as she can guarantee a passing bill.

Because she hasn't done this means that she can't get a majority of Rep's to stand with her and pass a clean CR. It also doesn't bode well for the rest of the Republicans who are being replaced by Tea Party Rep's. The Republicans are doing what their constituents want and a good majority of them know they might be the next one out the door if they cross that line.

And there were only 6 actual votes that bucked the Republican leadership.

Pelosi doesn't stand a chance, because those Republicans that defect will be defecting to new jobs come the next election.

Besides even you have to admit that the crap poor sequestration deal, and our current level of spending has to be curbed. The nation can't possibly keep spending at these levels and expect hyperinflation not to happen.

And that is the crux of the issue a lot of people in these districts that are voting for the Tea Party reps know the debt issues have to be checked.

reply to post by Timing

If there were enough Republicans to pass a clean no strings attached CR then Pelosi could get a majority to vote for a discharge petition as long as she can guarantee a passing bill.

And they are planning just that, but since a discharge petition can only be introduced on the second and fourth Monday of the month, they can't really do that right now can they.

And they wouldn't want to do that unless they were forced to do it, if they do that it is a smack in the face to Boehner and he would do nothing until the 14th if they did that now. So that remains an option, but an option the Republicans that are willing to switch really don't want to execute.

AlienScience
reply to post by JacKatMtn

 

Why doesn't the Senate allow votes on their floor to approve the House proposals? They would PASS that's why...

It would pass?

Are you sure of that? Do you have the names of the Democrats that would vote with the Republicans? Do you have their public statements that say they are ready to pass the House proposals?

Because I have the list of names of the House of Republicans that said they are ready to vote on a clean CR and it is enough to pass it.

So let's see the list of Senate Democrats that support the House proposals.

The Senate could have passed ANY of the HOUSE bills and passed it on to the President for his VETO, and then it would come back to Congress, and then the blame game could start...

The Senate voted on the first CR the House sent over (the one Cruz tried to stall even though he supported it). They amended it to remove the ACA modifications and sent it back to the House for approval. So to say that they haven't voted on any of the House bills is 100% untrue.

Update: Or maybe not. On Monday evening, the House adopted a rule for consideration of tonight's continuing resolution with only six Republican "no" votes, of which only two came from moderates: Reps. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and Charlie Dent (R-Pa.)

Business Insider asked Kevin Fogarty, spokesman for Rep. King, what happened to the moderate revolt that King was trumpeting. Fogarty replied: "You would have to ask the moderate offices that."



Read more: www.businessinsider.com...


So much for your big GOP revolt...

reply to post by AlienScience


Here is what they are trying to do.

Actually, they have to refer the bill to the House Rules Committee then after a week of inaction they can gather signatures...

AlienScience

xstealth

AlienScience
reply to post by xstealth

 

Obama doesn't have when to vote when he tells all he will veto any efforts, there is no point of it going to a vote.

LOL.

Then why do House Republicans continue to vote?

They will vote on anything except the one thing they know will end the shutdown and that Obama will sign.

But you continue to say it is Obama, who has no control right at this moment, to do anything about the shutdown.

They continue to vote because it's their job.

They do it, Obama doesn't, he will probably go golfing this weekend.

You forget how our government works, you and Obama want it to be a dictatorship, but it's not.

You talk yourself in circles.

First it is Obama's fault, then I explain that Obama has no role in this because he has no vote in Congress, then it is useless to vote on a clean CR because of Obama, but now Republicans are voting on bills they know don't have a chance to get through the Senate to do their job....circles man...complete circles.

Republicans could do their job and vote on a clean CR, which will pass because enough republicans have supported it, which would pass the Senate and Obama would sign it.

Instead, they are just wasting time passing bills they 100% know have zero chance of passing the Senate.

But go ahead, keep supporting them for "doing their job".

This is bait. lol bait if Ive ever seen it. Its old hat.

edited for manners.

Kratos1220
So.. correct me if I'm wrong, but Obamacare would be forcing people to buy healthcare or be fined for not doing so.. annd.. there are people on here who are defending this? There is a difference between offering this program to people as another health care option and forcing people to purchase this product from the government or face continuous fines until you do. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would sit here and defend this knowing that it will take just a few more freedoms away from the american people. So, the bill became a law and SCOTUS backs it up and yet this is seemingly the only reason some of you are supporting this? Christ, don't you have minds of your own to see this is WRONG? Health care needs fixing, but not like this.. doesn't the government already have a firm enough grip around our necks already? I, for one, do not wish to give up my right to choose AND not be fined for doing so.

edit on 4-10-2013 by Kratos1220 because: (no reason given)

You make it sound like we are the only first-world country to do this type of thing. Look at this list of healthcare systems rated by the World Health Organization in overall quality as related to cost. Look at all the healthcare systems rated higher than the U.S., as of 2000. Click on the country names to see how many of them have universal healthcare available to ALL their citizens, and how many have either a mandatory tax or a mandatory purchase of health insurance to fund their universal healthcare. The vast majority of these are free countries, not communist countries, or countries with totalitarian governments.

en.wikipedia.org...

The U.S. is seriously behind, my friend. It is time we catch up to the rest of the first-world countries when it comes to affordable healthcare for all - and yes - that involves some kind of mandatory tax or health insurance purchase.

reply to post by kaylaluv


I found a ranking that is more recent than the WHO ranking, but the U.S. is still ranked one of the least efficient healthcare systems. And, the more efficient healthcare systems all have some kind of mandatory tax/insurance purchase.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

So what can the U.S. learn from the many countries that get more bang for their health care buck? Unsurprisingly, there is no one formula for success when it comes to efficient medical care. The systems that rank highly on Bloomberg's list are as diverse as the nations to which they belong. The unifying factor seems to be tight government control over a universal system, which may take many shapes and forms -- a fact evident in the top-three most efficient health care systems in the world: Hong Kong, Singapore, and Japan.

reply to post by xstealth

Update: Or maybe not. On Monday evening, the House adopted a rule for consideration of tonight's continuing resolution with only six Republican "no" votes, of which only two came from moderates: Reps. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and Charlie Dent (R-Pa.)

Business Insider asked Kevin Fogarty, spokesman for Rep. King, what happened to the moderate revolt that King was trumpeting. Fogarty replied: "You would have to ask the moderate offices that."

So much for your big GOP revolt.

Ummm...that was from Monday...6 days ago.

Things have change since then, no one was expecting Boehner to let the shutdown go past a couple days.

But again, go ahead and deny reality, tell me how that works out for you.

reply to post by AlienScience


I tell you what Democrats won, my dear, a big sweeping lost in next elections and with that big lost they could very much lose the majority in congress, that means that the Republican that wins can pass law to do whatever they want to Obamacare, because by next elections Obamacare will be hated by most majority working class Americans if the program last that long.

The irony. . . . then another filibuster, shutdown or just a temper tantrum from Democrats? he, he, he.

reply to post by crazyewok


1. The US never left recession. I don't know how it is at a few of the hand picked locals around the country but around the country areas unemployment is still at 2009 levels +- tenths of a percent.

2. Once again, not sure where you've been but welfare has already been on a steady increase as well as food stamps. I'm sure this is a sure sign that we beat that recession, huh?

3. The US makes enough tax money to pay interest on debts and still have over 150 billion left over a month. If it chooses to spend that money elsewhere instead of paying on the debt, how does that have anything to do with the debt ceiling? "We need to be able to borrow more money so we can use it to pay off the interest on the money we have already borrowed." It is like getting a new credit card to pay off an old one every money, only this scenario we only pay interest, we don't actually pay off the debt.

4. The "average" American doesn't have a well off "non-essential" government job. They work in factories, the military, and in small business and guess what, the government shut down has no effect on them. That is unless you count this charade that parks needs to be closed because of it and now people can't enjoy their comfort time. Once again, not a result of the shut down, a result of Obama and the White House forcing their hand to MAKE Americans feel it however they can.


As for the 800,000 workers who are not furloughed. Boo hoo. Time to join the rest of the 20% of Americans who are jobless and have to struggle just to find an odd job here and there. I'm supposed to feel sorry for people who were given jobs by the government simply to create the illusion of a better unemployment standard? That is all it is correct? I own a business and help manage a couple others and guess what - we don't have "non-essential" jobs.


Obama controls the depth of the shut down and is going everything in his power to expand bits and pieces of it so that it is felt more by Americans. He has so obviously done so these past few days that you have to be blind or simply a cult follower to ignore the details.

As for this entire topic in general, I'm really quite sickened by the lack of support.

Yes, the government was shut down based on ideology and principle. But if not for that then what? What better reason could there be for a shutdown other than one in DEFIANCE of one of the most unconstitutional laws ever passed?

People are actually supporting the forced purchasing of something on the American people. It doesn't matter if other countries have done this, it doesn't matter what Obama thinks - the majority of the American people don't want this. And even if they did what about the minority? What ever happened to the Republic where it wasn't mob rule over everyone else?

I hope the government shut down lasts a LONG LONG time and the only way I want to see it end is with Obamacare gone, done. I watched as this law was passed by tricks and schemes all while hundreds of protesters stood outside of Congress well into the night to show their defiance. I know the long term effects of this law. There could be nothing more worth it besides getting rid of something like the NDAA or Patriot Act.

So people lose their "non-essential" jobs, jobs that were more than likely created simply to skew unemployment numbers into the governments favor. Welcome to reality where at least 20% of Americans are without work and even more are losing their jobs and hours thanks to this Health Care Law. Welcome to America where we can be "recovering" from a recession yet food stamps and welfare numbers continue to rise exponentially.

If you people aren't going to grow a back bone and face the licks of flames in order to ensure the little bit of freedom we have left, I am at least glad that there is that tiny group in the House of Representatives that will. I'm supposed to be guaranteed FREEDOM in this country, not a job, not a walk to national monuments, FREEDOM.

But apparently people are so willing to give that up for the sake of the almighty dollar: the new god in modern society.

reply to post by TheNewRevolution


Amen to that, we have been in a recession since 2008 and we have not gotten out of it yet, I guess people keep forgetting the QEs that are still been pay to the bankers in Wall Street to keep them from failing, QEs is just another word for the infamous Bailout, most Americans feel better when is not longer call Bailouts.

The irony.

reply to post by TheNewRevolution


I would give you unlimited stars if I could! Two posts that perfectly state what is happening. Wonderful! Everything I have been thinking and just couldn't get out in words because my brain seems to be stuck looking in amazed horror at what is happening.

marg6043
reply to post by AlienScience

 

I tell you what Democrats won, my dear, a big sweeping lost in next elections and with that big lost they could very much lose the majority in congress, that means that the Republican that wins can pass law to do whatever they want to Obamacare, because by next elections Obamacare will be hated by most majority working class Americans if the program last that long.

The irony. . . . then another filibuster, shutdown or just a temper tantrum from Democrats? he, he, he.

That's your opinion. There was a popular opinion prior to 2012 that Obama had zero chance of winning re-election...we see how that played out.

I doubt the Republicans can take the Senate, just like I doubt the Dems can take the House. And one thing is very clear to me, in 2016 the Republicans have a very low chance of winning the Presidency.

But 2014 doesn't matter, Obama will still be in office and he still has veto power. IF, and it's a big if, the Republicans could take the Senate in 2014, it wouldn't be a veto-proof majority.

AND, even if they had all that...they can't simply repeal the ACA at that point and there is no going back to the old system. No one is going to support going back to having pre-existing conditions, annual and lifetime caps, and kicking off kids their parents insurance. No one is going to support closing of the exchanges after people are insured through them.

This is why the Republicans are so hell bent on trying to stop it before it starts because they know once it starts (which it already has), there is no stopping it and going back to the old system. There is only one option to move to after the ACA, and that is a single payer system. If they want to do that, more power to them.